SALMOND AND THE FOI
First Minister in missing records riddle over Hollie Greig abuse allegations
Share on facebookShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services12The
Scottish Government is refusing to disclose whether it has lost or
destroyed communications records relating to the Hollie Greig case which
may indicate when the First Minister Alex Salmond became aware of
allegations of sexual abuse, which Ms Greig claims was carried out
against her over many years whilst resident in the Aberdeen area. Last
month the Scottish Ministers were compelled by the Information
Commissioner to address a series of questions put to the First Minister
in correspondence in relation to the case in January this year, the
first of which was: “When did you first become aware of the allegations
made by Hollie Greig about her being abused by members of a high-ranking
paedophile ring in Scotland?”The commissioner required the Scottish
Ministers to respond by today’s date or risk being held in contempt of
court. It was reported in April 2009 that Greig received a payout of
£13,500 from the criminal injuries compensation authority, and was
described by Detective Inspector Iain Allen of Grampian Police as “a
truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent
victim.” Two Grampian Police Officers interviewed Greig in September
2009. No charges have been brought against anyone in connection with
sexual abuse. The Scottish Ministers’ response to the question, issued
by the First Minister’s Private Secretary Terry Kowal stated: "Following
a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established we do
not have a record of when the First Minister became aware of these
allegations. Therefore, the information you require is not held by the
Scottish Government." However, The Firm has seen correspondence from the
Crown Office dated 23 July 2009 addressed to the Greig family’s lay
representative Robert Green, which suggests that correspondence
addressed to the First Minister outlining the allegations was received
over two years ago. "Thank you for your email of 20 June 2009 to the
First Minister in which you raise concerns about the handling of the
case involving allegations of abuse perpetrated against Hollie Greig,"
the letter says. The letter then says that Green’s inquiry was passed to
the Crown Office for response, given the nature of the subject matter.
When pressed by The Firm to explain the apparent contradiction between
the two positions, the First Minister’s office told The Firm today only
that “we do not have a record of when the First Minister first became
aware of these allegations”. The First Minister’s office have
acknowledged receipt of The Firm’s subsequent query asking whether the
records had been destroyed, but have offered no direct response, despite
repeated requests. Russell Fallis of the Scottish Government
communications team issued a statement to The Firm that said the First
Minister’s office “receives a large volume of correspondence on a wide
range of subjects, which is answered by that office or by relevant
officials” , and added that the Government does not have “any indication
that this information was recorded.” Pressed to confirm whether the
correspondence was destroyed or lost, the First Minister’s office has
provided no response. The correspondence questioning the First Minister
was sent on 28 January and had received no response, despite a series of
reminder letters. The Information Commissioner later ruled that the
Scottish Ministers had failed to comply with their obligations under
Sections 10(1) and 21(1) of the Freedom of Information Act.This
afternoon the Information Commissioner confirmed he is now considering
whether “further action is required” against the Scottish Government in
respect of their handling of the original correspondence containing the
six queries. In May, Andrew George MP wrote to Lord Advocate Frank
Mulholland asking him to outline the options available to “those many
people who remain concerned” about the “unsafe” investigations into the
Hollie Greig case. “There appears to be a lot of evidence and
allegations which point in one direction and indicates that this whole
case deserves a through review,” George wrote in constituency
correspondence. He adds that “many of the professionals with whom she
came into contact…have allegedly failed in their duties or even covered
up important facts.” George was the second Westminster MP to raise
concerns about the case, following David Ruffely MP’s intervention
earlier this year.
No comments:
Post a Comment